Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mozilla Partners with Real Networks

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the need-a-realware-checker dept.


engineer_uhg writes to tell us that Mozilla has just entered into a multi-year agreement with Real Networks to have Firefox distributed with downloads of RealPlayer, Rhapsody, and RealArcade. The Mozilla team cited Real's estimated 2 million downloads per day as a great tool for distribution. However, many Firefox supporters question the move, complaining of questionable practices by Real.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Pathetic (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835631)


Re:Pathetic (4, Interesting)

Aqua OS X (458522) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835691)


By why the hell don't they distribute something like VLC or MPlayer? Real loves to brag and brag about their download stats, but I imagine most of those numbers are from their install base. I practically NEVER need to view RM. Almost everything I run into is Quicktime, MPEG, Windows Media, DivX, or Flash Video.

ha (1)

corvax (941506) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835757)

The funny thing about the rhapsody jukebox software is that it requires Windows media player> so that to me tells me what they think about their own product (realplayer) > i use linux so this wont effect me anyway but i think it is a bad move on behalf of the mozilla foundation :(

Re:Pathetic (3, Informative)

hpavc (129350) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835846)

Fire fox is just being bundled with their some of their downloads. It has nothing to do with firefox and video players. If the VLC or MPlayer people wanted to bundle firefox likely they could go ahead and do so quite easily.

Looking at your post though it seems like your asking why real isn't bundling vlc and mplayer though.

black cloud w/silver lining... (4, Insightful)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835634)

While I certainly wish Mozilla the best of luck in ramping up the distribution of their products, I wish they'd picked a better net citizen to accomplish that goal.

Re:black cloud w/silver lining... (5, Interesting)

neoform (551705) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835652)

Yeah, well as long as we don't get infected with real's products when we download firefox, what's the problem?

Re:black cloud w/silver lining... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835697)

Mozilla is in the business of getting their software used by as many people as possible, they're not in the business of saying what other companies or organisations should or shouldn't do.

If they want to win the browser wars (to use an old term) then securing 2 million installs is a good step.

Well done Moz. :)

Re:black cloud w/silver lining... (5, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835773)

They may get more people downloading their browsers, but Firefox's core market has always been geeks. Associating themselves with a company that is almost universally reviled by geeks is a huge slap in the face to Firefox's core group of supporters.

This move really underscores the rift in the Open Source community as to what the goal of Open Source really is. Should we be spreading a philosophy, or just trying to get as many people using our favorite software as possible? If we're trying to spread the Open Source ideal, then partnering with a company known for distributing spyware and generally embodying all of the worst aspects of closed source software is a bad idea. If all we're trying to do is get everyone to use the same software that we do, why do we even care if that software is open source to begin with?

This move indicates a lack of sensitivity to the Open Source philosophy, and seems to complete Mozilla's move from a community-driven project to a market share obsessed company.

Amen to that (1)

bdwoolman (561635) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835770)

I use Real over WMP but they are awfully agressive about polluting the old system tray. Real's practices could arguably stand as the archetype for a lot of spyware. If it's sleazy chances are Real did it first. They backpeddle when they get caught but I would like to smack those bad boys. I like Winamp's behavior a little better.

As for Firefox... I'm seriously thinking of switching to Opera anyway. Heck I live in Norway these days.

Har du bra.

I don't wish them luck... (0, Troll)

sgant (178166) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835798)

I was hoping that Real would have a nice, slow death and never be heard from again. But now it looks like Mozilla is prolonging the inevitable.

So Long as... (5, Insightful)

Mozleron (944945) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835635)

We don't have to get RealPlayer or any of Reals other crap crammed down our collective throats with our FireFox downloads, i don't care what they do.

Re:So Long as... (1)

BarneyRabble (866644) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835663)

Unfortunately you will also get those lovely little pop up windows on the right side of your toolbar in Windows saying "Firefox Update is ready to go!" Click here to restart Firefox now. *click* updates not only firefox but the crappy bloated Hell-ix player. No thanks Real, ill keep Firefox seperate like its supposed to be.

Just what Firefox needs... (0)

AP2k (991160) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835637)

...bundled Real spyware...

Re:Just what Firefox needs... (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835786)

Not sure why this is insightful...

mine contains no spyware, but then I'm using a Linux version, so maybe there's a difference for each OS.

Real (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835638)

I keep tryi.... *buffering*.... ng to read.... *buffering*.... the story...

This quote may be too obscure, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835809)

Do Not Want.

Ummm... memory footprint? (0, Redundant)

JordanL (886154) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835639)

I already use Opera over Firefox because of, among many other things, the excessive memory footprint of Firefox. I don't think bundling it with bloated software like RealPlayer is the best way to improve that perception or problem.

The article seemed to indicate that Real player = Mozilla but Mozilla != Real Player, which would be the right move IMO.

Re:Ummm... memory footprint? (5, Informative)

vivek7006 (585218) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835702)

I already use Opera over Firefox because of, among many other things, the excessive memory footprint of Firefox. I don't think bundling it with bloated software like RealPlayer is the best way to improve that perception or problem.

Einstein, read the story again. Realplayer download will include firefox and will give users the option of installing firefox while they install realplayer. No one is embedding realplayer inside firefox.

Yeah but... (1)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835780)

Now it's dirty by association.

Doesn't matter to me though. Switched to Opera when Mozilla buggered up from an updated extension.

Maybe (2, Insightful)

MrSquirrel (976630) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835643)

The reason RealPlayer has 2 million downloads per day? Because people download it, install it, use it for what they need... then get it hell off their machine! RealPlayer is worse than a virus! Mozilla, why?! That's like partnering with cocaine dealers because they distribute to 2 million people a day. Ughhh! I feel DIRTY!

Should combine with AOL too (1)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835744)

Then the user could snort coke off the disc after clicking "no thanks" 50 times in order to install Mozilla. :)

What's wrong with it? (1)

spirit of reason (989882) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835647)

Their questionable practices, eh? I'm not sure I see anything wrong with this. It seems like just another way to gain share. I wish there was a link to the complaints.

News for Today (-1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835651)

In a move that stunned the world, the developers of Firefox teamed up with the makers of possibly the most annoying software available to play media files. The addition of Real Player to Firefox distributions means users can be assured of annoying popups and an attempt at least daily for Real Player to try to take over their computer to make sure that it is the "deflaut" player for everything under the sun. The inclusion of Real Arcade means that users can stop worrying about getting their work done. Instead they can now play games all day and zone out while doing about "15 minutes of real work on any given day".

Re:News for Today (2, Insightful)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835722)

Dunno how you got modded insightful. If you checked the article, you'd see that it's Firefox getting bundled with Realplayer, not the reverse.

Sure, Real is bad, horrible, evil, but if they manage to get people away from IE (perhaps with the inclusion of a subtle "[X] Check here to make Firefox your default web browser", I'd say huzzah to the lesser of two evils.

And maybe (/wishful thinking) if the Fox devs can smack some sense into Real devs during downtime, added bonus.

Re:News for Today (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835844)

I agree that it is great that Firefox is added to Real Player and not the other way around. However people are still going to see an opportunity to download Firefox and not see the opportunity to do it seperately from Real Player. This happened to me when I downloaded Firefox as a bundle with the Google Toolbar. Now I know better and I could have gone to the official website but most people are just going to be lazy and download both together.

Plus my post was in more of a humorous tone then an insightful one so I agree that I don't know how I got modded that way. Oh well I can't complain.

Re:News for Today (0, Troll)

alienw (585907) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835810)

It's not added to firefox, fucktard. Firefox is added to realplayer. Learn to read.

Re:News for Today (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835868)

Calling me a fucktard over a technacality is uncalled for. The truth is that a lot of people are going to download them as a bundle because they don't know any better and Real Player will forever be associated with Firefox and vice versa.

I despise Realplayer and view it like a virus (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835653)

I despise Realplayer. It does nothing for me, and when it gets installed, it's harder to get rid of than spyware. Even things like trying to make it not phone home is practically impossible and the boxes and alerts that come with it are supremely annoying.

For the past 3 years, I have lived perfectly fine without it, and there aren't any websites that require Realplayer anymore.

I love Firefox, but I hate Realplayer even more, so if it comes pre-bundled with Realplayer, it means I won't EVER be upgrading, or maybe I will build directly from the sources.

Re:I despise Realplayer and view it like a virus (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835713)

I understood it to mean that when you download the real player, you get firefox too. Is it the other way around also>?

Re:I despise Realplayer and view it like a virus (1)

vivek7006 (585218) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835743)


Firefox is not coming with realplayer. Its the other way round. Realplayer will come with forefox. This is no different than google desktop teaming up with sun for java downloads.

Re:I despise Realplayer and view it like a virus (2, Funny)

dedazo (737510) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835748)

Um, the deal is Firefox gets distributed with RealPlayer, not the other way around. If you just get FF you'll never see the Real crapware[1] - but I suppose in some situations you'll get FF bundled with Real.

So this changes nothing for users of FF, but might be good for Real users who clearly deserve to be expunged from the gene pool by virtue of having willfully downloaded the #1 rated crapware on teh interwebs.

At least maybe, maybe they'll use FF instead of IE, which is good at least until IE7 is generally available.

[1] I hope to hell that assumption is correct.

Bundling one way (3, Informative)

phorm (591458) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835787)

From what I read, it comes bundled with downloads of realplayer, but realplayer is not bundles with downloads of firefox.

In other words: Firefox=Firefox, Realplayer=Realplayer+Firefox

Still not the nicest company to bundle with in terms of reputation, but at least it doesn't seem that you're getting stuck with Real when installed firefox.

Re:I despise Realplayer and view it like a virus (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835847)

I despise Realplayer. It does nothing for me, and when it gets installed, it's harder to get rid of than spyware.

I believe things have changed for the better, but IIRC, RealPlayer didn't cause any problems provided you took the time to configure it, not unlike installing Windows for the first time and needing to spend a good amount of time unchecking and disabling all the "features." Most people didn't, of course, and hence the outcries of "spyware."

That said, the RealAlternative codec works fine, and when used with mplayerc (for Windows users), the playback problems are gone. No need for RealPlayer.

"Questionable" (4, Insightful)

LuminaireX (949185) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835655)

However, many Firefox supporters question the move complaining of questionable practices by Real

That understates the reaction quite a bit. Real is one of the worst things to hit the Internet since AOL, IMHO

Re:"Questionable" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835800)

"That understates the reaction quite a bit. Real is one of the worst things to hit the Internet since AOL, IMHO"

Hey now, I hate Real as much as the next guy, but I love AOL [axe-s.com]

Bundled downloads suck (5, Insightful)

SoCalChris (573049) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835656)

Bundled downloads suck, especially for people with slow internet connections.

Just give me what I requested, don't add a bunch of crap to the download that I don't need or want. Does Mozilla want Firefox to become "That crappy browser that came with the music player"?

Re:Bundled downloads suck (1)

me at werk (836328) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835695)

Often times I've seen bundled downloads basically say "Oh, you wanted that component too? Since we don't think that many people are going to use it, we have to download it from our site now". Also, Google Pack [google.com].

Re:Bundled downloads suck (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835700)

I'd say any way they can get an extra user on Firefox, even underhandedly, is a plus.

It'd be really great if during the Real player install there's a checkbox tucked away that says "Make Firefox your default Web Browser". The common folk rarely check what those boxes are for, and just assume the default values are best.

Re:Bundled downloads suck (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835753)

YES! What particularly rubs me the wrong way is the way that you cannot get quicktime without itunes. I hate itunes, I hate the interface and I particularly hate the way that it bumps up the size of my download when I'm trying to get quicktime over a dialup connection.

Bundled downloads are crap.

Re:Bundled downloads suck (2, Insightful)

weasello (881450) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835865)

Or, more accurately,

"Slow internet connections suck... Especially for people getting bundled downloads."

To compete, Opera has announced... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835658)

...a partnership with the government of Nigeria.

Opera will tout itself as a new standard as the preferred Acid 2 compliant browser of 419 scammers.

Bad idea. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835659)

Its a really bad idea to tarnish the name of Firefox with an association with the malware known as realplayer. Big thumbs down.

Re:Bad idea. (2, Funny)

fluffywuffy (844881) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835795)

Agreed. And if Mozilla wants to cozy up with bloated POS software then Why don't they go the whole hog and bundle it with vista?

Re:Bad idea. (1)

joshier (957448) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835880)

I have to admit, I am shocked... This is the first time I've ever seen Mozilla do such an act.

Is it bad or good?.. well, as the AC above quite rightly points out, Realplayer is a widely known heap-of-junk.. and to be associated with that and the total free-open source Firefox internet browser is really quite surprising.

Oh well, let's see how it goes, if it increases user base by a large margin, and people adopt Firefox and love it (I'm sure they will) then I see this as being an advantage in the longterm.

If Firefox's development slows to a snails pace, and people have it on their machine, it won't add a good name to Firefox at all, it'll get widely known as the browser which is bug-ridden and a haven for viruses, but saying that, I don't see it happening :)

Oh and, one last note.. I love how 2.0 beta is coming on, It's adding some additional very slim and needed features (such as spelling in text boxes).

I hope they do things right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835662)

I've pretty much boycotted RM player for being slow, intrusive, etc. As long as FF doesn't try to default-install this stuff, or god forbid, update, I will be fine.

3 quicktime/winamp, lightest general use player ever!

I want to cry, this just [buffering...] (3, Funny)

pla (258480) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835666)

Mozilla has just entered into a multi-year agreement with Real Networks

Look, if you plan to sell your soul, at least sell it to the devil himself, not just any ol' schmuck in goat leggings.

Like Billy G - Now he might have given you fame, power, glory, girls (hey, look at Melinda!). But no - Instead, you gave your soul to a guy named Phil who smokes too much and ends every sentence with "Trust me!".

In five years, when you all look back and wonder how you went from posing a serious threat to MSIE, to posing a sort-of-maybe threat to Opera - Remember this day.

Oh fuck! (1)

ringbarer (545020) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835668)

Does this mean we won't be able to uninstall Firefox properly anymore?

Real are inventors of Cancerware. And it's those cunts we have to 'thank' for the proliferation of ruined PC installs, adware pop-ups, and purple fucking gibbons.

And just as Firefox was getting a respectable marketshare too.

Great! (1)

Cherita Chen (936355) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835669)

This should make uninstalling Firefox/Mozilla a real Joy! I'd rather a nasty case of dysentery than have a "Real" product installed on my system (dysentery is much easier to get rid of...)

ouch (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835681)

IMNSHO Real Player is a plague to be avoided like syphilis. Ok, so if Mozilla will be distributed with Real software that is one thing, but I don't want to download Mozilla just to find out that Real software is in the installation package.

Whatever it takes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835684)

I can't fault Moz/firefox for proliferating itself, but I hope this is only one of many bundling strategies they're attemping. I personally will never download any Real products again, but I'm sure their content strategy is working to some degree. Still, it won't win Moz/firefox the market

First BBC, now Mozilla? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835690)

First BBC, now Mozilla?
Why do these people partner with Real?
Obviously the deal makers have never used the software and seen what a piece of crud it is.

Re:First BBC, now Mozilla? (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835856)

First BBC, now Mozilla?

I was under the impression many things on BBC can be used with Windows Media Player Granted you're probably thinking which is the lesser of two evils, but you do have a choice.

Real Networks anihilated their credibility . . . (1)

ihatelaserbeams (949421) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835705)

. . . with the Release of RealOne player. Not only did they bundle in malware that changed media process control all over the OS map, it had these "helpful" internet processes that hijaked ports to download "suggestions" and "information". In the olden days, it was a lightweight media player that snapped open and actually did some network negotiation to deliver an optimal stream - download Real Player now and it takes 60 seconds to load on my dual core while it propigates its navigation with advertisements and crap from Real Network's CDN.

Re:Real Networks anihilated their credibility . . (1)

Shawn is an Asshole (845769) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835855)

Try the Linux version. It's quite minimal, opens fast, and does it's job. The Mac version is also decent (doesn't force you to subscribe or try to run all the time). IMHO, it's much better than the crippled Quicktime. For Windows, though, that's where "Real Alternative" is an excellent choice.

Oh please. (1, Insightful)

falsified (638041) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835708)

It's not bad because of Real. It's bad because if I'm downloading a program, then THAT'S what I want, not that extra shit. This bundling has always annoyed me - try getting Quicktime without having to download a 25-meg copy of iTunes (which, if you don't use the store, is a pain in the ass to use).

Re:Oh please. (1)

me at werk (836328) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835726)

Ok. Go to the page and look on the right, and there's a standalone quicktime installer. Guess what! iTunes not included.

Re:Oh please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835836)

Despite your poor choice of example, I completely agree with you. The absolute worst lately is bundled toolbars (Yahoo, MSN, even beloved Google). Look, fuckface. All I want is an image viewer; I don't want the fucking Yahoo toolbar, and if you MUST include it for fuck's sake why the hell is it set to install by default? Fuck you and everything you believe in.

Thank god it's not the Itunes Quicktime issue. (2, Insightful)

kinglink (195330) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835712)

At least you still CAN get firefox alone.

I can't download Itunes, unless I download Quicktime media player. I swear the only reason macs are better for video is because Apple has yet to create a GOOD version of Quicktime media player for the PC. Luckily MPC can use quicktime file formats, though I'm sure apple is mad about that one. But the fact I have to get their less than wonderful software on my system, infecting it, just so I can go use Itunes (which I enjoy), and listen to music (perhaps paying for more music)

I just hope firefox stays solo and corporately neutral, because it's the one thing that keeps Firefox high up in my book.

Re:Thank god it's not the Itunes Quicktime issue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835845)

vlc media player

Re:Thank god it's not the Itunes Quicktime issue. (1)

Jrabbit05 (943335) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835864)

So can Winamp I belive without any add ons. It is better than it being coupled with quick time AND Itunes.

I hope you illiterate fools realize... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835715)

...that Firefox is being bundled with Real's stuff, not the other way around.


Re:I hope you illiterate fools realize... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835852)

Flamish but fitting. Some people don't seem to be reading past the title here.

Hope it's not the other way around. (1)

brainboyz (114458) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835724)

I can deal with that bundling since I don't download RP. If RP starts coming with Firefox, then FF will be out the window in a heartbeat!

What does it mean? (1)

kosmosik (654958) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835727)

I wonder what consequences will it have:

- when I download Firefox I will be faced with a webpage that urges me to get RealPlayer (but I still can opt-out from that)?

- when I download Firefox I will be forced to grab 20MB setup.exe only to choose to not install RealPlayer and only install Firefox which is about 5MB?

I am curious because in fact I hate RealPlayer and consider that is RealCrap. But on I don't mean Mozilla getting some money and pumping it into developement of its open source products.

So in fact it remains to be seen how they will implement this cooperation.

Re:What does it mean? (1)

kosmosik (654958) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835754)

Oh! Now I get it. Now I actually read the article which says that Real will distribute Firefox along with its downloads, not the other way (Mozlilla will distribute Real). Way to go.

Wave of relief (1)

RyoShin (610051) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835728)

I was about to post a rant about how stupid this move is, until I saw that it was RealNetworks distributing FireFox, not the other way around.

As long as Mozilla doesn't distribute RealPlayer (or related products) with FireFox I have no problems.

Never again will that spawn be on my PC.

As long as... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835732)

As long as Mozilla stuff doesn't ship with Real Networks crap, I'm fine with it.

No worse than selling computers with Windows on it with Mozilla installed, really.

Re:As long as... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835777)

Wow, another trolling subscriber-fag. Didn't see that one coming.

Summary misleading, Firefox bundled in Realplayer (1)

Derivin (635919) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835734)

Real Networks entered into an agreement with Mozilla Foundation to bundle Firefox into downloads of Real Network Applications.

Firefox will NOT come with any Real Network applications.

Will this extend to Real's agreements with OEMs? (4, Insightful)

mikefe (98074) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835739)

Real player is bundled by a lot of OEM manufacturers. If this extends to that also, it will be a tremendous boon to Firefox!

I hate Real (player) (1)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835742)

So much built in advertising for so little gain vs the alternatives. But so long as they're bundling Firefox with Real downloads, and not the other way around, I suppose there's no problem with that, unless Mozilla is paying them.

Yeah? (1)

eighty4 (987543) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835747)

Is it really so much about so-called "business practises"... or is it just because Real stuff JUST SUCKS?

And Sunbird (1)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835782)

Mozilla got so much money. But do they invest in development? I fear they don't. Just look at Sunbird [mozilla.org], Lightening or whatever the calendar is called these days. Or NVU's son KompoZer [sourceforge.net]?

Mozilla has the ressources to cross-finance development of other tools, to bootstrap open source. But it seems they don't want to.

I mean we have a successful tool called Firefox every company likes to play with, including a fanatic user community. We have a a wonderful mail client which lacks a calendar tool.

But what about other tools of the community? Chatzilla - wouldn't it be nice to get a standalone version? Or Fireftp stabdalone? A preconfigured Bugzilla server distribution. KompoZer. Better spellchecking tools and dictionaries. Tools for Internet Cafés, I think of a kind Browser-Only plugandplay Linux distribution. Brushed Theme for Thunderbird. An ODF view plugin. A usable pdf viewer. Developer Conferences coorganised by their mozilla-hungry AJAX-fanatic bigbusiness friends.

Real Networks, oh well.

Resolving some ambiguity. (1)

McNally (105243) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835807)

Although any connection with Real makes me feel slightly soiled, I think it's important to resolve some ambiguity in the story write-up.

As I understand it this deal means that you will get Firefox when you download RealPlayer, etc.

It does not appear to mean that you will get RealPlayer when you download Firefox.

The former is slightly scummy. The second would seriously taint Firefox in many people's eyes.

Firefox as spyware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835811)

So does this mean that FireFox is going to get classified as spyware along with all the other Realplayer crap? Will, like other Realplayer crap, FireFox not get uninstalled when you uninstall Realplayer??

READ THE ARTICLE PEOPLE!!!!!!! (4, Informative)

Temujin_12 (832986) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835816)

It says:
RealNetworks said Wednesday that it has agreed to a multiyear agreement to offer Mozilla's Firefox Web browser with downloads of its RealPlayer, Rhapsody and RealArcade software programs.
RealNetworks will be packaging Firefox with their software NOT the other way around. If anything, Firefox zealots should be happy about this as it means that Firefox will now be introduced to a larger number of people who otherwise may not have downloaded and installed Firefox on their own.


Can we call off the Calvary now?

Just Read the Article, and... (1)

Da Rabid Duckie (731742) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835820)

...I'm not seeing anywhere where it says that RealPlayer will come bundled with future versions of Firefox, only that Firefox will come with Real Products.

Of course, if it DOES come to pass I give it two days before someone comes out with a Firefox Extension called "RealRemover"

Will firefox still be included in Linux distros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835821)

Their not gonna change their license or anything are they?

Ack! (1)

beavis88 (25983) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835825)

Big mistake IMHO. Real appears to suck just as badly today as they did when I swore I'd never use their player again, what, 7-8 years ago? But I guess money talks. I sure don't have much to throw Mozilla's way, so...

If Slashdot were Wikipedia... (4, Funny)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835827)

Stephen Colbert would be pointing to the groupthink mentality about now :-)

Knee-jerk now, read the article later.

I learned long ago that I hated everything Real (1)

cyber1kenobi (666018) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835833)

Realplayer pissed me off way back... when they started with their systray crap. EUREKA - I think they may have been the pioneer of annoying, increadibly usesless system tray icons! Ya feel me? Apple and Quicktime, yes, you are also idiots. What a waste of space! I don't need or want extra, pointless icons and software that adds itself to startup only to waste memory & time. The fact that Firefox comes with Realplayer and not the other way around is the only good thing about this move. Here's to the sites that force folks to get deal with Realplayer in the first place - you're idiots too. Wow, I've wanted to vent on that for a long time.

Cool, time to start using Opera (1)

Lord Bitman (95493) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835843)

There is No Excuse for Real to still be around. There is no excuse for anyone to associate with Real.

As a representative of the collective... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15835860)

As a representative of the collective internet users group I can tell you
that Real does not have that many downloads (I'm a net head and all my friends
would NEVER!) so not only is this not going to help the "open source browser"
but it will severly hurt it.

not a problem (1)

hollowedOut (940591) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835867)

real player is a necessity when you want to listen to audio clips from sites such as http://www.npr.org/ [npr.org], but i don't hear any complaints about that one.
RP is not really that big of an issue provided you babysit the installation and only install what is needed to run rm streams. it's definitely not as big an issue as it was a number of years ago. the most annoying thing i find about it is when websites make you pick a specific media player, because variety IS the spice of life, but i can understand a group's choosing one format to avoid the cost of encoding across multiple formats.
now i just have to figure out if any of the 130 New Critical Objects Ad-Aware [lavasoftusa.com] found on this computer were caused by Real Networks software so that I can make sure my foot isn't anywhere near my mouth...

Old sayings (1)

Kev_Stewart (737140) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835878)

What was that saying? If you lie down with dogs you get fleas?
If people download RealPlayer and realise it's crap, won't they also regard the progs that were bundled with it as crap also?

Besides. RealPlayer is a dead end format used by dusty old porn sites.

Or so I'm er.. told :)

Google pack (1)

shird (566377) | more than 7 years ago | (#15835879)

The beloved Google also distributes real in its Google pack [google.com]. There seems to be some google-mozilla-real alliance, which is a shame that Real is in that equation, cause it really is quite crap. Money talks I guess. And its the only "decent" (I use that term very loosely) commercial media player that isn't owned by Microsoft or Apple.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account